The Virginian

Wednesday, July 31, 2019

Every non-liberal leftist -- that is, nearly every Democrat running for president, New York Times and Washington Post columnist, CNN and MSNBC host, and your left-wing brother-in-law -- labels every Trump supporter and, of course, President Donald Trump, a "racist."And they don't stop there. Leftists don't only label the half of the country that supports the president "racist," they label all whites and America itself "racist." If your son or daughter attends or recently attended an American university, it is close to certain he or she was repeatedly told that America and all whites are racist.According to the left, whites are divided between those who admit they are racist and those who don't admit it.

They are all part of a truly historical lie

From the day Stalin labeled Trotsky -- who served as the head of the Red Army and who, along with Lenin, founded the Bolshevik Party -- a "fascist," leftists have lied about their opponents.

Tuesday, July 30, 2019

Having given up on accusing Trump of being Hitler, they are now saying he's Satan

They’re [Trump supporters] the most vacant group of people….Devil worshipers have a higher standard than he [Donald Trump] does. Devil worshipers. You couldn’t be a pedophile, you can’t speak bad about people, you can’t take things from people. Like, you could worship the devil and be a better human being than if you worshiped Donald Trump….Look up the tenets of the Church of Satan….and then go to a Trump rally and you’ll feel safer around Beelzebub than this dude.”— Comedian and former CNN host D.L. Hughley on TVOne’s The D.L. Hughley Show, July 23.

Senator Kamala Harris defended the Rev. Al Sharpton as someone who has “spent his life fighting for what’s right,” after President Trump called the MSNBC host and controversial figure a “con man,” claiming he “hates whites & cops.”If Harris believes inciting violence, leading race riots, rallying anti-Jewish protests, and corporate shakedown schemes count as “working to improve our nation,” then Sharpton has gone above and beyond.

Since the 1980s, Sharpton has engineered protests, boycotts, and riots, often pitting African Americans against Jewish communities. Perhaps the most gruesome being a four-day race riot in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, after a Hasidic driver killed the child of Guyanese immigrants in a tragic car accident. Sharpton stirred up anti-Semitic protesters, shouting, “No justice, no peace!” They targeted innocent Jewish homes, breaking windows and setting cars on fire, and an angry mob murdered the Jewish driver, Yankel Rosenbaum. Sharpton lead the mobs who chanted about killing “bloodsucking Jews” and “Jew bastards.”

Days after being named chief of Venezuela’s feared Sebin intelligence agency last fall, General Manuel Ricardo Cristopher Figuera was called in by President Nicolas Maduro and asked where the enemy was.“I don’t understand the question, sir,” Figuera says he responded.“I want a report every two hours of what the political opposition is doing,” Maduro replied, listing some of the 30 politicians whose whereabouts and activities were to be surveilled. Reports, he said, needed to be sent not only to him but to his wife, Cilia Flores, and to Vice President Delcy Rodriguez. The monitoring involved spreadsheets with photos, mobile phone taps and round-the-clock shifts of on-the-ground four-agent teams observing movements and meetings.Figuera, the most significant Venezuelan defector of the past two decades, is in the U.S. offering details of Maduro’s increasingly authoritarian rule and the schemes by which he, his family and associates embezzle the proceeds of oil, gold and other national treasures as the once-wealthy nation of 30 million descends into chaos and starvation.

Looking at our immigration policies compared to the rest of the world, you'd think America lost a bet.The United States is one of only two developed countries in the world (the other is Canada, and even it has some restrictions we don't have) with full "birthright citizenship," meaning that any child born when his mother was physically present within the geographical borders of the U.S. automatically gets a U.S. birth certificate and a Social Security card.That means legal immigrants, pregnant women sneaking in on tourist visas, travelers on a three-week vacation, cheap foreign workers on "temporary" visas and, in some cases, foreign diplomats.There are laws on the books that say the kids born to diplomats don't automatically become citizens simply by being born here but - like so many of our immigration laws - these are treated as mere suggestions.And that's not all.We're the only country but two that confers automatic citizenship on children born to illegal aliens, or "anchor babies." This is not "birthright citizenship," which refers to children born to legal immigrants. (There's nothing vulgar, bigoted, racial or sexual about the term "anchor baby." It's a boating metaphor: A geographical U.S. birth "anchors" the child's entire family in this country by virtue of the baby's citizenship.)The other two countries that grant citizenship to anchor babies are Canada and Tanzania. Canada doesn't have Latin America on its border, of course - and Tanzania is reconsidering the policy.

Here's a familiar action-movie trope: The protagonist has to defuse a time bomb as it's ticking down the seconds to detonation, with just minutes left. BEEP-BEEP-BEEP! He finds the right wire to cut. The sweat drips down his face, the music swells dramatically, and... he snips it! Whew. Except that instead of defusing the bomb, he's just set the clock forward so now he only has seconds left.That's what just happened to the environment, apparently. We thought we had a whole 12 years left to do something before we all die from globalclimatewarmingchange, but apparently that wasn't scary enough. The clock just got moved way, way up.That means November 3, 2020 — the U.S. presidential election — is the deadline for Americans who do not want to destroy the health and well-being of current generations, their children, and future generations.

The home run statement of Dr. Epstein, who admitted he was a Democrat, is that the rock bottom lowest effect of Google in a US election is 2.5 million votes if it uses its available tools to influence users in voter choices, with the upper effect in a range of more than 10 million votes.Then it got very interesting as Senator Cruz questioned a Google rep on the company’s assertion that it is fair and impartial and would not attempt to influence political activities. Of course, that is a joke; everybody knows it is a joke and that Google execs are hair-on-fire leftists who would never consider voting for a Republican, and that’s just the beginning.When confronted with Project Veritas tapes of Google exec commitment to the Democrat party success and willingness to organize an effort to make sure Trump was not re-elected, the Google representative was just short of speechless, claiming the position she took in the beginning of the examination, that she represented a company that was not in the business of influencing and manipulating the public.

If a person as private and unknown as Nick Sandmann can be libeled and slandered in this fashion without any recourse to the courts, then none of us is safe from this abuse at the hands of the media with the collusion of judges who are more interested in currying favor with the right people than administering justice.

In a 36-page ruling, U.S. District Judge William Bertelsman noted that the Post never mentioned Sandmann by name in its initial coverage of the incident, referring only to groups of “hat wearing teens.” Bertelsman added that “the words used contain no reflection upon any particular individual” and thus could not be constituted as defamation. The judge also ruled that the newspaper used language that was “loose, figurative,” and “rhetorical hyperbole” which is protected by the First Amendment.

This is insane. It is now legal for a major newspaper to single out a teenager and label him a racist and generate an online mob to make death threats and to cause incalculable to the kid’s future because this incident will be on the internet forever, visible to college admissions staff and human relations staff, none of whom are the sharpest tools in the shed and could fail to find the resolution of the issue.

The Sandmann family said they would be asking the appellate court to review the trial court’s decision on appeal.“I believe fighting for justice for my son and family is of vital national importance,” said Ted Sandmann, Nicholas’ father. “If what was done to Nicholas is not legally actionable, then no one is safe.”“The law must protect innocent minors targeted by journalists publishing click-bait sensationalized news,” Todd McMurtry, co-counsel for the Sandmann family, said in the statement. “This is especially true in the current hyper-partisan political environment.”

Bingo. What the Washington Post did was wrong and they did it for the political hit against Trump and for the f***ing clicks. What this shows more than anything else is how we are now subjects and not citizens. The institutions of government and the large corporations are allies. They protect one another against the powerless and we’re expected to nod at their wisdom and move on. If a person as private and unknown as Nick Sandmann can be libeled and slandered in this fashion without any recourse to the courts, then none of us is safe from this abuse at the hands of the media with the collusion of judges who are more interested in currying favor with the right people than administering justice.

This proves conclusively that the judiciary is partisan, biased and evil. And Judge William Bertelsman is exhibit "A" for what's wrong and needs to be impeached. These are members of the ruling class, protecting each other.

First, she attempts to burnish her "poor but honest" background, like Lincoln, portrayed as "honest Abe, the rail-splitter" after being ridiculed on Twitter for throwing a fancy party with all the Democrat movers and shakers in Washington in attendance.

I, the daughter of a D.C. cop, and Carl, the son of an Illinois plumber, were hilariously painted as decadent aristocrats reveling like Marie Antoinette when we should have been knitting like Madame Defarge.

And then:

[The hearing} was many underwhelming hours of members of Congress reading to Mueller and Mueller saying, Yes, that’s what I wrote. Or at least what somebody wrote.

CNN Paid Shill David Gergen: The Republican Committee Members
Brought Up a Lot of Material That Was Surprising and New to CNN Viewers,
Because We On CNN Just Never Even Bother Covering That Side of the
Story

Think about the idiots who have been selling you on Robert Meuller's unquestionable integrity and character for the past three years.Ask yourself:How many of these mediocrities, poseurs, and middle-management types has so much as met the man?How many have done more than met him -- like, actually known him in more than a rope-line shake-and-smile?How many have read a book about him or largely about him?How many know him well -- either as a friend or, better yet, work colleague?I'd say almost none of them. With an exception here or there, like Andy McCarthy.And yet they all vouched for him because they heard from other unaccomplished nobodies that he was a Solid Man, and those unaccomplished nobodies in turn heard it from yet other unaccomplished nobodies.So here are all these unaccomplished nobodies repeating shit they heard from other unaccomplished nobodies in a gigantic pseudo-intellectual circle jerk in which no one ever questions "Why do we place all of our faith in this one man that not a one of us has so much as even met?"

I don't think this is a big deal, to be honest. If she's already demonstrated she's willing to divorce her own brother, obviously she wouldn't have any compunctions about divorcing someone she's not related to.

Someone said this to me, and I'm not sure if this is snark or a genuine legal analysis: "She has to divorce this guy so she can remarry her brother, so he can't be forced to testify against her."

Robert Mueller testifies.

Keep this in mind when the Democrats in the House are issuing subpoenas by the truckload.

Why are the Senate Republicans not calling Hillary Clinton to testify, under oath, about her knowledge regarding the payments she was making through cut-outs to Russian intelligence operatives for political dirt?And more importantly: Why are we not asking that? Why has no one proposed that?Here's my answer. And I think this is true -- and chilling.Because we're conditioned to understand, in our very bones, that we're not allowed to ask that.That we're not permitted to even think that.Demanding Hillary Clinton testify about her own payments to Russians seems obvious. She paid Russians for dirt, which I'm assured is treason.Why are we not taking the simple, obvious step of questioning her about her treason?But no one -- and I do mean no one -- even suggests it because of the terroristic left and the constant barrage of media criticism and attacks has put us into a state of constant self-censorship which has evolved into actual, genuine doublethink.It's not that we think of this and then dismiss it as impossible.We don't even allow ourselves to think it in the first place.That's doublethink -- that's the goal of the Inner Party. To make it impossible to even think a thought that the Inner Party disapproves of.They're not doing 90% of the censorship. Oh, they're doing 10% of it, and it's a big 10%.But 90% of it they're making us do ourselves.They've made us so conscious of their demands, and so fearful of their response for not fulfilling those demands, that it has become an autonomous nervous response for our brains to avoid even thinking things that would displease our masters.They say that if you leave a leash on a dog for five years, even when you take the leash off, he'll remain in the perimeter the now-missing leash would have permitted him.That's where we are. Unable to even make ourselves venture outside the small little circle our Masters have permitted us.Doublethink. We know that Good Conservatives -- Conservatives who do not get attacked and doxxed and harassed by partisan government officials -- simply do not ask things like "Why isn't Hillary Clinton, the ultimate paymaster who paid Russians for dirt to attempt a soft coup, being asked questions under oath?"Even thinking that immediately causes our superegos to step in and shut that thought down: That's not proper! That's not who we are!

The Democratic National Committee has sued the sovereign country of Iran over the right to use “Death to America” as their 2020 Presidential campaign slogan.The lawsuit, which includes the right to use “America is the great Satan (even though we don’t believe in God)” as well, will be the first lawsuit to capitulate at the outset and just give the world’s #1 state sponsor of terror a flat fee of $4 billion in cash.“We believe that we have the right to use this slogan in our materials as we Democrats have been trying to kill America much longer than Iran has,” DNC Chair Franz Finklebottom said.

Friday, July 26, 2019

"Just checking facts wasn't enough anymore---now, people are looking to Snopes to be the moral arbiter of which opinions are OK and which ones are not," said a spokesperson for the website. "This has been a long time coming. We've pretty much been doing this all along, but disguising it as a 'fact check.' So now we can just be much more upfront with people about what our intentions are."

Wednesday, July 24, 2019

I almost felt sorry for Robert Mueller, who at 74 is clearly not the incisive interlocutor that he, by reputation, once was. ‘Dazed and confused’ read one Drudge Report headline. Exactly. Mueller’s cringe-making performance, full of blank, deer-in-the headlights stares, multiple requests to repeat the question (‘Director Mueller, what day is it today?’ ‘Would you repeat that?’), and a blinking, incontinent porousness in his responses, made the entire spectacle painful to watch. Asked about Fusion GPS, which hired Christopher Steele to compile the infamous Russian-sourced ‘dossier’ against Trump, Mueller said that was ‘not familiar‘ with them. Uh oh.Scary option: he was telling the truth. As I say, I almost felt sorry for Robert Mueller — emphasis on the adverb — and then I remembered how many lives that horrible fanatic had ruined over the course of his career and what he and his squadron of Trump-hating lawyers put the country through for the past three years.

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Robert Mueller was being criticized for seemingly answering questions slowly, not recalling key details of his investigation, and appearing to be confused throughout his testimony Wednesday.After a brief recess, Mueller insisted he was entirely lucid."I hear a few murmurs out there that I've lost it," he said. "Well, I haven't lost it. I've still got it. In fact, I'm still sharp as a tack."Before testimony could resume, however, Mueller interrupted the proceedings, appearing to reach for his cell phone. "I really have to take this," he said apologetically as he reached into his pocket and pulled out a banana. "Yeah, go for Bob."Mueller proceeded to have what appeared to be a five-minute conversation on the fruit as bewildered congresspeople looked on. "Well, tell them I don't want to be there this Friday. Matlock's on, you know that. You know I don't go out when Matlock is on." He shrugged apologetically at those in the room, mouthing "sorry.""Look, if the consulate has a problem with that, tell them they can call me themselves," he concluded, slamming the banana back down on the table.At publishing time, Mueller was seen giving clear, concise, lucid testimony to a soap dispenser in the restroom.

Tuesday, July 23, 2019

Boris Johnson new British Prime Minister!

An NPR listener said the senator's passing marked "the end of civility in the U.S. Congress." Yes, indeed. Who among us does not mourn the lost "civility" of the 1987 Supreme Court hearings? Considering the nomination of Judge Bork, Ted Kennedy rose on the Senate floor and announced that "Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit down at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution."Whoa! "Liberals" (in the debased contemporary American sense of the term) would have reason to find Borkian jurisprudence uncongenial but to suggest the judge and former solicitor-general favored resegregation of lunch counters is a slander not merely vile but so preposterous that, like his explanation for Chappaquiddick, only a Kennedy could get away with it. If you had to identify a single speech that marked "the end of civility" in American politics, that's a shoo-in. And in fact setting a new moral standard in which a drunken adulterer's appetites can cause a woman's death and he pays no price is also an end to civility.If a towering giant cares so much about humanity in general, why get hung up on his carelessness with humans in particular? For Kennedy's comrades, the cost was worth it. For the rest of us, it was a high price to pay. And, for Ted himself, who knows? He buried three brothers, and as many nephews, and, as the years took their toll, it looked sometimes as if the only Kennedy son to grow old had had to grow old for all of them. Did he truly believe, as surely as Melissa Lafsky & Co do, that his indispensability to the republic trumped all else? That Camelot – that "fleeting wisp of glory," that "one brief shining moment" – must run forever, even if "How To Handle A Woman" gets dropped from the score. The senator's actions in the hours and days after emerging from that pond tell us something ugly about Kennedy the man. That he got away with it tells us something ugly about American public life.

This is the 50th anniversary of the day that Ted Kennedy killed Mary Jo Kopechne.

We are enjoined not to speak ill of the dead. But, when an entire nation – or, at any rate, its "mainstream" media culture – declines to speak the truth about the dead, we are certainly entitled to speak ill of such false eulogists. In its coverage of Senator Edward M Kennedy's passing, America's TV networks are creepily reminiscent of those plays Sam Shepard used to write about some dysfunctional inbred hardscrabble Appalachian household where there's a baby buried in the backyard but everyone agreed years ago never to mention it.In this case, the unmentionable corpse is Mary Jo Kopechne, 1940-1969. If you have to bring up the, ah, circumstances of that year of decease, keep it general, keep it vague. As Kennedy flack Ted Sorensen put it in Time magazine:

Both a plane crash in Massachusetts in 1964 and the ugly automobile accident on Chappaquiddick Island in 1969 almost cost him his life.

That's the way to do it! An "accident," "ugly" in some unspecified way, just happened to happen – and only to him, nobody else. Ted's the star, and there's no room to namecheck the bit players. What befell him was a thing, a place. As Joan Vennochi wrote in The Boston Globe:

Like all figures in history – and like those in the Bible, for that matter – Kennedy came with flaws. Moses had a temper. Peter betrayed Jesus. Kennedy had Chappaquiddick, a moment of tremendous moral collapse.

Actually, Peter denied Jesus, rather than "betrayed" him, but close enough for Catholic-lite Massachusetts. And if Moses having a temper never led him to leave some gal at the bottom of the Red Sea, well, let's face it, he doesn't have Ted's tremendous legislative legacy, does he? Perhaps it's kinder simply to airbrush out of the record the name of the unfortunate complicating factor on the receiving end of that moment of "tremendous moral collapse." When Kennedy cheerleaders do get around to mentioning her, it's usually to add insult to fatal injury. As Teddy's biographer Adam Clymer wrote, Edward Kennedy's "achievements as a senator have towered over his time, changing the lives of far more Americans than remember the name Mary Jo Kopechne."You can't make an omelet without breaking chicks, right? I don't know how many lives the senator changed – he certainly changed Mary Jo's – but you're struck less by the precise arithmetic than by the basic equation: How many changed lives justify leaving a human being struggling for breath for up to five hours pressed up against the window in a small, shrinking air pocket in Teddy's Oldsmobile? If the senator had managed to change the lives of even more Americans, would it have been OK to leave a couple more broads down there? Hey, why not? At The Huffington Post, Melissa Lafsky mused on what Mary Jo "would have thought about arguably being a catalyst for the most successful Senate career in history. Who knows – maybe she'd feel it was worth it." What true-believing liberal lass wouldn't be honored to be dispatched by such a death panel?

Monday, July 22, 2019

Sources tell RealClearInvestigations that Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz will soon file a report with evidence indicating that Comey was misleading the president. Even as he repeatedly assured Trump that he was not a target, the former director was secretly trying to build a conspiracy case against the president, while at times acting as an investigative agent.Two U.S. officials briefed on the inspector general’s investigation of possible FBI misconduct said Comey was essentially “running a covert operation against” the president, starting with a private “defensive briefing” he gave Trump just weeks before his inauguration. They said Horowitz has examined high-level FBI text messages and other communications indicating Comey was actually conducting a “counterintelligence assessment” of Trump during that January 2017 meeting in New York. In addition to adding notes of his meetings and phone calls with Trump to the official FBI case file, Comey had an agent inside the White House who reported back to FBI headquarters about Trump and his aides, according to other officials familiar with the matter.

If Comey lied to Trump — who is, after all, a federal official — it’s prosecutable as a False Statements Act violation. It would be lovely irony if Comey wound up facing one of those, after engineering them for others.

~Laura Rosen Cohen once again offered SteynOnline readers her round-up of stories
you may have missed from around the internet. This week's list included
Twitter's decision to vaporize Lindsay Shepherd's account for the
purported crime of "misgendering." In case you missed it, Mark's
interview with Lindsay from last year can be seen here.

Sunday, July 21, 2019

When the right decided to agree with the left that bigotry was the only reason gay marriage wasn't a thing, it came with the full Folsom Street Fair accessory pack: florists and bakers must serve the gays; drag queens get to read your kids stories; trannies get to use the ladies' can and compete in womens' sports; everyone must use the correct pronouns and affirm that a boar is a sow; you're a bigot for not dating chicks with dicks.Ask yourself, how much fight have you seen the GOP and supposedly conservative media figures put up on these issues?

As such proposals indicate, American liberalism has remarkably come to resemble nineteenth-century British Tory Radicalism, an aristocratic sensibility that combined strong support for centralized monarchical power with a paternalistic concern for the poor. Its enemies were the middle classes and the aesthetic ugliness it associated with an industrial economy powered by bourgeois energies. For instance, John Ruskin, a leading nineteenth-century Tory Radical and a proponent of handicrafts, declaimed against “ilth,” a negative version of wealth produced by manufacturing.Like the Tory Radicals, today’s liberal gentry see the untamed middle classes as the true enemy. “Environmentalism offered the extraordinary opportunity to combine the qualities of virtue and selfishness,” wrote William Tucker in a groundbreaking 1977 Harper’s article on the opposition to construction of the Storm King power plant along New York’s Hudson River. Tucker described the extraordinary sight of a fleet of yachts—including one piloted by the old Stalinist singer Pete Seeger—sailing up and down the Hudson in protest. What Tucker tellingly described as the environmentalists’ “aristocratic” vision called for a stratified, terraced society in which the knowing ones would order society for the rest of us. Touring American campuses in the mid-1970s, Norman Macrae of The Economist was shocked “to hear so many supposedly left-wing young Americans who still thought they were expressing an entirely new and progressive philosophy as they mouthed the same prejudices as Trollope’s 19th century Tory squires: attacking any further expansion of industry and commerce as impossibly vulgar, because ecologically unfair to their pheasants and wild ducks.”Neither the failure of the environmental apocalypse to arrive nor the steady improvement in environmental conditions over the last 40 years has dampened the ardor of those eager to make hair shirts for others to wear. The call for political coercion as a path back to Ruskin’s and Mishan’s small-is-beautiful world is still with us. Radical environmentalists’ Tory disdain for democracy and for the habits of their inferiors remains undiminished. True to its late-1960s origins, political environmentalism in America gravitates toward both bureaucrats and hippies: toward a global, big-brother government that will keep the middle classes in line and toward a back-to-the-earth, peasantlike localism, imposed on others but presenting no threat to the elites’ comfortable lives. How ironic that these gentry liberals—progressives against progress—turn out to resemble nothing so much as nineteenth-century conservatives.

[Classical] Liberalism, which had once viewed men and women as capable of shaping their own destinies, now saw humanity in the grip of vast ecological forces that could be tamed only by extreme measures to reverse the damages that industrial capitalism had inflicted on Mother Earth. It had become progressive to reject progress.Rejected as well was the science that led to progress. In 1970, the Franco-American environmentalist René Dubos described what was quickly becoming a liberal consensus: “Most would agree that science and technology are responsible for some of our worst nightmares and have made our societies so complex as to be almost unmanageable.” The same distrust of science was one reason that British author Francis Wheen can describe the 1970s as “the golden age of paranoia.” Where American consumers had once felt confidence in food and drug laws that protected them from dirt and germs, a series of food scares involving additives made many view science, not nature, as the real threat to public health. Similarly, the sensational impact of the feminist book Our Bodies, Ourselves—which depicted doctors as a danger to women’s well-being, while arguing, without qualifications, for natural childbirth—obscured the extraordinary safety gains that had made death during childbirth a rarity in developed nations.Crankery, in short, became respectable. In 1972, Sir John Maddox, editor of the British journal Nature, noted that though it had once been usual to see maniacs wearing sandwich boards that proclaimed the imminent end of the Earth, they had been replaced by a growing number of frenzied activists and politicized scientists making precisely the same claim. In the years since then, liberalism has seen recurring waves of such end-of-days hysteria.

I can't help but laugh at the delusions of Liberals when they call themselves the Party of Science.

On Thursday, Judicial Watch and The Daily Caller News Foundation released 84 pages of documents revealing that the Obama State Department was central to advancing the Russian collusion hoax narrative prior to the 2016 presidential election. Included in the documents is “a September 2016 email exchange between then-Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and Special Coordinator for Libya Jonathan Winer, a close associate of dossier author Christopher Steele, discussing a ‘face-to-face’ meeting on a ‘Russian matter.’”The documents obtained by Judicial Watch also show that State Department officials continued to use unsecure BlackBerry devices for the transmission of classified material more than a year after Hillary Clinton’s use of an unsecure, non-government email system was revealed.Last month, The Daily Caller also reported that Jonathan Winer “facilitated meetings between Christopher Steele and private consulting firms,” and “had contact with Glenn Simpson, the founder of Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that hired Steele on behalf of the Clinton campaign and DNC.”Winer's involvement in advancing the Russia collusion hoax also includes disseminating information that would end up in the dossier to the State Department and to the media prior to the election.

Montana Democratic Sen. Jon Tester said Thursday the best way for Democrats to beat President Trump in 2020 is to “go back and punch him in the face” in an interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”“I don’t think, even in states where Donald Trump won big, that it did you any good running away from Donald Trump,” he said. “I think you need to go back and punch him in the face. The truth is this guy is bad for this country.”

A crazed nut-job attacked a practice of the congressional GOP baseball team. The hatred that drove 66-year-old James Hodgkinson to attempt a massacre of the Republican baseball team was that Republicans are sub-human haters. That hatred has been fermented by the Democratic Party, and it began long before Donald Trump Became president.For years the Democrats have portrayed their Republican opposition as sub-human, narcissistic, greedy, rich, fat-cat, corporate chieftains and/or hillbilly, gun-toting, women-hating, religious fanatics, and racist xenophobes who hate Jews and want to reinstitute slavery.

Former Democratic New York governor Mario Cuomo evoked the image of "Republican storm-troopers." Another New York Democrat, Congressman Major Owens, went further: "These are the people," he thundered, "who are practicing genocide with a smile: they're worse than Hitler." The ideas that the Gingrich Republicans stood for—limited government, welfare reform, tax cuts, deregulation—don't seem to have all that much to do with Nazism and the Holocaust. But in the political rhetoric of today's liberals, fine distinctions often get lost.Just reminder, being civil to America's left doesn't mean you'll get civility back for you rookies out there.

Samuel Adams ...delivered in a fiery stem-winder of a speech at the Philadelphia Statehouse in August of 1776 –

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”

Me – I have now had the experience in several different theaters of realizing that certain people, politicians, media, intellectual and entertainment figures of note, or even the establishments they work for – are no longer our countrymen. In fact, those certain people and their establishments deeply despise us ordinary, moderately-conservative, content and hard-working middle class citizens. They hate us, indeed – with a passion that convulses their souls, and drips in their every word like corrosive acid. They hate that we are individual, un-biddable, independent and proud. They hate it even more ferociously that we are not humble in the manner of the 19th century lower class Europeans in the face of nobles and bureaucrats, and they despise everything that we honor and relish, from church membership, to where we choose to shop, to adorn our homes and what we do for hobbies. They hate it that we have the franchise and exercise it, too – and even assume that it is our right and duty to be politically-involved; most recently with movements like the Tea Party. (Which, inter alia, shook and is still shaking the current ruling class down to its bones – hence the viciousness of the reaction to it, from the media, to popular entertainment and to the long-established political parties.) Most of all, I think – they despise us for not giving a damn what they think particularly, and rejecting practically everything that they tell us to do – ride public transportation, move into urban stack-a-prole housing, give up eating meat (or much of anything else), and continuing to believe that we can raise our own children and sort out our own lives without self-elected nannies breathing down our necks 24-7. Very likely the well-manicured and delicate hands of the new ruling class itch for a whip to give us all a good thrashing for our temerity. Indeed – they are no longer our countrymen in spirit, any more than the Tory sympathizers who departed the American colonies two hundred years and more ago are.The most galling quality of the TWANLOC ruling class is how they constantly preen themselves on being so cultured, so tolerant, intellectual, competent and so very, very non-racist … unlike the ordinary rest of us; the veteran, the blue-collar working stiff, the stay-at-home-mom, the cashier working at the local grocery store, the owners of companies large and small. Alas, nine out of ten, the TWANLOC ruling class is not particularly cultured, tolerant or intellectual. Nine out of ten, the most vicious bigotries and stereotypes drop from their lips and into their narratives … and yet they remain blissfully unaware of their own faults and shortcomings.

Today's Leftists are not brave transgressive forward-thinkers but pathetic memebots running the program of a dead tyrant. Read the whole thing.

... the Soviet espionage apparat actually ran two different kinds of network: one of spies, and one of agents of influence. The agents of influence had the minor function of recruiting spies (as, for example, when Kim Philby was brought in by one of his tutors at Cambridge), but their major function was to spread dezinformatsiya, to launch memetic weapons that would damage and weaken the West.In a previous post on Suicidalism, I identified some of the most important of the Soviet Union’s memetic weapons. Here is that list again:

There is no truth, only competing agendas.

All Western (and especially American) claims to moral superiority over Communism/Fascism/Islam are vitiated by the West’s history of racism and colonialism.

There are no objective standards by which we may judge one culture to be better than another. Anyone who claims that there are such standards is an evil oppressor.

The prosperity of the West is built on ruthless exploitation of the Third World; therefore Westerners actually deserve to be impoverished and miserable.

Crime is the fault of society, not the individual criminal. Poor criminals are entitled to what they take. Submitting to criminal predation is more virtuous than resisting it.

The poor are victims. Criminals are victims. And only victims are virtuous. Therefore only the poor and criminals are virtuous. (Rich people can borrow some virtue by identifying with poor people and criminals.)

For a virtuous person, violence and war are never justified. It is always better to be a victim than to fight, or even to defend oneself. But ‘oppressed’ people are allowed to use violence anyway; they are merely reflecting the evil of their oppressors.

When confronted with terror, the only moral course for a Westerner is to apologize for past sins, understand the terrorist’s point of view, and make concessions.

As I previously observed, if you trace any of these back far enough, you’ll find a Stalinist intellectual at the bottom. (The last two items on the list, for example, came to us courtesy of Frantz Fanon. The fourth item is the Baran-Wallerstein “world system” thesis.) Most were staples of Soviet propaganda at the same time they were being promoted by “progressives” (read: Marxists and the dupes of Marxists) within the Western intelligentsia.The Soviets consciously followed the Gramscian prescription; they pursued a war of position, subverting the “leading elements” of society through their agents of influence. (See, for example, Stephen Koch’s Double Lives: Stalin, Willi Munzenberg and the Seduction of the Intellectuals; summary by Koch here) This worked exactly as expected; their memes seeped into Western popular culture and are repeated endlessly in (for example) the products of Hollywood.Indeed, the index of Soviet success is that most of us no longer think of these memes as Communist propaganda. It takes a significant amount of digging and rethinking and remembering, even for a lifelong anti-Communist like myself, to realize that there was a time (within the lifetime of my parents) when all of these ideas would have seemed alien, absurd, and repulsive to most people — at best, the beliefs of a nutty left-wing fringe, and at worst instruments of deliberate subversion intended to destroy the American way of life....The most paranoid and xenophobic conservatives of the Cold War were, painful though this is to admit, the closest to the truth in estimating the magnitude and subtlety of Soviet subversion. Liberal anticommunists (like myself in the 1970s) thought we were being judicious and fair-minded when we dismissed half of the Right’s complaint as crude blather. We were wrong; the Rosenbergs and Alger Hiss really were guilty, the Hollywood Ten really were Stalinist tools, and all of Joseph McCarthy’s rants about “Communists in the State Department” were essentially true. The Venona transcripts and other new material leave no room for reasonable doubt on this score.Another consequence of Stalin’s meme war is that today’s left-wing antiwar demonstrators wear kaffiyehs without any sense of how grotesque it is for ostensible Marxists to cuddle up to religious absolutists who want to restore the power relations of the 7th century CE. In Stalin’s hands, even Marxism itself was hollowed out to serve as a memetic weapon — it became increasingly nihilist, hatred-focused and destructive. The postmodern left is now defined not by what it’s for but by what it’s against: classical-liberal individualism, free markets, dead white males, America, and the idea of objective reality itself.The first step to recovery is understanding the problem. Knowing that suicidalist memes were launched at us as war weapons by the espionage apparatus of the most evil despotism in human history is in itself liberating. Liberating, too, it is to realize that the Noam Chomskys and Michael Moores and Robert Fisks of the world (and their thousands of lesser imitators in faculty lounges everywhere) are not brave transgressive forward-thinkers but pathetic memebots running the program of a dead tyrant.

Saturday, July 20, 2019

Bruce Charlton, professor of Theoretical Medicine at the University of Buckingham in England, wrote that "that landing of men on the moon and bringing them back alive was the supreme achieve- ment of human capability, the most difficult problem ever solved by humans." That's a good way to look at it: the political class presented the boffins with a highly difficult and specific problem, and they solved it—in eight years. Charlton continued:'Forty years ago, we could do it—repeatedly—but since then we have not been to the moon, and I suggest the real reason we have not been to the moon since 1972 is that we cannot any longer do it. Humans have lost the capability.

I suggest it's because of the political culture ...

These days we are unmanned in more than merely the sense of that Luna 2 expedition. Glenn and Armstrong are gone, and their surviving comrades are old and stooped and wizened, and yet the only giants we have. Space may still be the final frontier, but today, when we talk about boldly going where no man has gone before, we mean the ladies' bathroom. Progress.

Recently, I wrote an article expounding on the theory that Barack Obama didn’t hate America, he hated Americans. Current events involving prominent (heck, all) Democrats, however, have given me a reason to doubt my hypothesis. I now believe he hates both America and Americans; and at this point, looking at the slate of Democrats who seek the presidency, as well as the constant and visceral provocations of the four female morons of the idiocracy, he is not alone....

The New Woke creed preaches that America was created by genocide, slavery, and greed. Unique in the world, we are a nation with no redeeming qualities. As Barry’s pal Jeremiah Wright said, “God damn America.” At the time he said it and Barry cheered, however, they were outliers. Now it is Democratic Party policy that America is deserving of neither respect nor admiration, much less love.

The LEFT/MSM/Democrats have been calling the President of the United States a Nazi, a fascist, a Russian agent, a white supremacist, a Traitor etc for 3 years because that's what they "think and feel" he is? I don't need anymore lectures from them. Not one.

Exactly right! Republicans always tried to raise above the vile language, labels, and accusations used by Lefties and never fought back. In the mean time, our educational system has been pumping out little Mussolini’s for the last 40-50 years. #NoMore

The Dems and media and NeverTrump LIED for more than two years that Trump had colluded with the Kremlin to steal the election. Innocent people were investigated by their own government and harassed by the media and mocked by the public. To date no one has been held accountable

The Left started this race war. They degrade citizenship. They trash Americans. They shoot at GOP congressmen and target pro-life high schoolers and chase people out of public spaces. They make the dangerous Nazi comparisons. They jeopardize our security and tranquilityThe Dems and media and NeverTrump LIED for more than two years that Trump had colluded with the Kremlin to steal the election. Innocent people were investigated by their own government and harassed by the media and mocked by the public. To date no one has been held accountableAnd what, now we’re supposed to watch our manners? Just take the abuse with a smile? Listen to ungrateful, unaccomplished, spoiled lawmakers insult us and this country and the president and what, be kind? No thanks

Tuesday, July 16, 2019

A few months ago I observed to Tucker Carlson that the difference between "Bush Derangement Syndrome" and "Trump Derangement Syndrome" was that the former was largely contained to a visceral loathing for the President himself, whereas the latter has been extended to anyone who voted for him - ie, the half of the electorate comprised of "racists", "fascists" and "white supremacists". Now TDS rampages on, to consume half the Democrats, too...

Like Nancy Pelosi and Slow Joe Biden

Let us take it as read that Trump is racist, and every Republican legislator is racist, and every Republican voter is racist. That's still not enough. Insufficiently Woke Democrats have to be racist, too:Ocasio-Cortez Implies Pelosi Is Racist for Singling Out 'Newly Elected Women Of Color'Speaker Pelosi has hosted meetings of "dreamers" where she thanked their parents for bringing them to the United States, because they're better than us, they're better than you. But you can cheer mass invasion and demographic replacement and still come up short, you racist. So it turns out even the vice-president to the first black president is likewise a racist:
Joe Biden's Racial Dog Whistle...In the 2012 election, a cocksure Biden assured a black audience that Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan were "gonna put y'all back in chains". That's how easy it was back then. He dozes off for twenty minutes and wakes up to find he's Simon Legree.

Today the Virginian Pilot published an editorial cartoon calling America racist and referred to Donald Trump's tweets where he tells some of Democrats who continually criticize America that they may want to first fix the cultures they left. They were labeled "incendiary."

So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly......

....and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how....

So I did a search of the Virginian Pilot archives finding dozens of references to Trump as a Nazi, a fascist, Hitler or as a racist. The Virginian Pilot never once called those vile slurs "incendiary." Is it any wonder that unhinged, violent radicals like Willem Van Spronsen are encouraged to shoot up an ICE facility in Tacoma, Washington? The press encourages him and people like him. They hold his coat and have his back.

But I digress. Back to Steyn:

As I said a couple of years back, when everybody's Hitler nobody's Hitler. And, indeed, when nobody's Hitler everybody's Hitler. Conservatives such as yours truly are inured to what passes for "debate" in America: if I critique AOC's Green New Deal and its plans to eliminate bovine flatulence, it's because I'm racist. It's not a difference over public policy, it's simply my bigotry. This strategy of labeling rather than debating has proved so effective that Republicans have given up talking about almost anything that matters - see, e.g., immigration until Trump entered the primaries four years ago. But, precisely because labeling has proved so effective for so long, it would be preposterous to expect the labelers to confine its use only to Republicans. Especially when labeling is all they know how to do.And so the Wokestapo (as Laura Rosen Cohen calls them) knock on the door, and Nancy Pelosi finds herself as reviled as old-time segregationists like, er, Mitt Romney. From USA Today:

No, the real issue here is what we academics call 'intersectionality' — the combined impact of racism, sexism and other types of discrimination on people and groups. In practice, it means that white women in power often take on the same characteristics of white men in power toward women of color.

So the Speaker of the House, quite without meaning to, has turned into Nancy Trumposi.

Saturday, July 13, 2019

Amazon is refusing to publish many reviews and ratings of the No. 1 best-selling “Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court,” according to multiple reports from readers who purchased the book directly from Amazon.

“Russia interfered in the election” became such an established truth of the mainstream press that expressing skepticism would be labeled a “conspiracy theory.” But now, in open court, an attorney representing the Department of Justice has admitted that the Russian government had nothing to do with the internet troll farm case.Mueller and Barr’s reckless publicity of unproven “Russian interference” allegations as “established” confronted federal Judge Dabney L. Freidrich with a challenge to her authority to preside over a trial to determine whether Concord is guilty of anything. Again, the Mueller report publicly pronounced that the Mueller team “established that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election through the ‘active measures’ social media campaign.” Really? So why are we even bothering to have a trial if the government has already “established” that Concord is guilty?

Now that a judge has rebuked Mueller for claiming this, one of Mueller's prosecutors comes before the judge and says that the Mueller team never claimed evidence of a Russian government connection:

Then what was the Mueller investigation all about?

Post-report, we’ve seen Mueller’s disingenuousness exposed: Kilimnik had extensive US ties that were minimized; Mueller team had to admit IRA, Russian troll farm, was not the Russian govt, & was rebuked by judge for suggesting otherwise;

Thursday, July 11, 2019

Jeffrey Epstein turned Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago into another of his hunting grounds for young girls, leading Trump to bar him from the Florida resort, court papers claim.“Trump allegedly banned Epstein from his Maralago Club in West Palm Beach because Epstein sexually assaulted a girl at the club,” according to the papers, filed in the Sunshine State as part of an ongoing legal battle between Epstein and Bradley Edwards, who represented many of Epstein’s underage accusers in civil suits against him.

In a move sure to spark broad controversy amid academics and historians across the nation, Berkeley’s History Department Chair has assigned new races to a number of America’s Founding Fathers in an effort to meet Berkeley’s new diversity goals for its history department.Berkeley’s History Department Chair, Peter Zinoman, said that the new goals, while “challenging”, were also “long overdue”.

Tuesday, July 09, 2019

Michelle Obama : “I Was An Angry Black Woman” ... WAS?

You’re right, Michelle. You are smart. You both are strategic. You both are cunning. You both knew what you were doing, we will give you both that credit where credit is due. You have not united this country but were instrumental in building the chaotic chasm that we see today. It’s ironic that democrats would like to credit the Obama administration’s economic policy to the numbers we are seeing today and not Trump’s economic policy but yet they are quick to blame the hate, the violence and the intense division directly on the Trump administration. Setting the tone in The White House DOES have residual effects and honey, we are seeing them unravel right before our very eyes.

It's no accident that the country's so sharply divided. It's the residual effect of the Obamas.

Thoughts on Trump

Tommy Pie - sing-along, it' s much better that way ( trust me I was a Camp Counsellor:)

Long long time ago I remember how that Justice used to make me smileand I knew that I had a chance, that if I risked a rapist's glancethat I might make the victims happy for a whileBut every day did make me shiver, with every summons they deliveredbad news on the doorstep, but I must take one more stepI do remember that I cried, with the threats made to my bride, and something broke deep down inside, the Day that Justice died.
" So bye-bye' Tommy showed its a lie,drove the People to the Bailey who then had to flyand Good Ole Judges were drinking scotch at the Club, singin':This day we sent Tommy to die, this day we sent him to die"
Did you write the Books of law, based on faith and God above? Or as Magna Carta tells you so?
Do believe in crocks and trolls, or just letting truth save your immortal soul? And can you tell me how to avoid a knife, real slow?
Well, I know the elite are not in love with him, watching with their evil grin,they all kicked off on Fake News, with weird digs at the Jews, Tommy with a well-cut suit, and an awesome widescreen truck, but we all knew he was out of luck,the Day that Justice died.
(Chorus) Yeah, sing it again with your family!
Now for six years Tommy's been on his own, after making sure no stones were thrown, but peace was not allowed to be.The Attorney sang for May and team, with a case made of those unicorn memes and a voice last heard in Nazi dreams, no voice allowed from you and me.
And while the Queen was off around, the despots stole her honored crown, the Courtroom then adjourned, a horrendous verdict just returned.
While Corbyn read a book on Marx, a quartet were stabbed in the park, we were shadow banned in the dark - the Day that Justice Died.
(Chorus)

Sunday, July 07, 2019

I'm paraphrasing, but it's generally true: "Libertarians seem to be OK with Google, or Facebook, or Twitter rigging the next election, as long as they are not "The Government."

To grasp the affinities between administrative governance and algorithmic governance, one must first get over that intellectually debilitating article of libertarian faith, namely that “the government” poses the only real threat to liberty. For what does Silicon Valley represent, if not a locus of quasi-governmental power untouched by either the democratic process or by those hard-won procedural liberties that are meant to secure us against abuses by the (actual, elected) government? If the governmental quality of rule by algo­rithms remains obscure to us, that is because we actively welcome it into our own lives under the rubric of convenience, the myth of free services, and ersatz forms of human connection—the new opiates of the masses.To characterize this as the operation of “the free market” (as its spokespersons do) requires a display of intellectual agility that might be admirable if otherwise employed. The reality is that what has emerged is a new form of monopoly power made possible by the “network effect” of those platforms through which everyone must pass to conduct the business of life. These firms sit at informational bottlenecks, collecting data and then renting it out, whether for the purpose of targeted ads or for modeling the electoral success of a political platform. Mark Zuckerberg has said frankly that “In a lot of ways Facebook is more like a government than a traditional company. . . . We have this large community of people, and more than other technology companies we’re really setting policies.”

When you are able to influence what people think and how they think, what is allowed and what is out-of-bounds you have the mechanism of tyranny, no matter if the influencers are government employees or private citizens. And these citizens are totally unaccountable via the ballot.

Meet the Socialist who - at least - have an idea of what the country's about. But then they're socialist so they're screwed up too.

Khachiyan says ‘a lot of these people are tyrannical narcissists’. ‘They are noncommittal, incapable of tolerating conflict or taking consequences. So they would rather have a system like polyamory where you kick that can down the road.’ Frost adds that many millennials ‘think they can eliminate jealousy… But sometimes you’re going to have bad sex, sometimes you’re going to be jealous. It’s not the end of the world.’We move from jealousy to hate, and to the alleged epidemic of racism or even fascism often talked up by the left. Hate speech, we’re told, must be contained. Khachiyan takes a refreshingly liberal line: ‘You should be able to hate and hatred should be protected, as long as it doesn’t spill over into physical violence.’ ‘There’s this idea that we live in a white supremacist country when we fundamentally don’t’, says Khachiyan. She mentions antifa, the self-styled anti-fascist group that, since our conversation, has hit the headlines for beating up a right-leaning journalist in Portland. ‘Antifa have manufactured a threat to have some semblance of an identity’, she says. ‘All these people who say they are anti-fascist don’t know what it means to be persecuted.’

In an era where #MeToo has toppled powerful men, Epstein’s name was largely absent from the national conversation, until the Miami Herald published a three-part series on how his wealth, power and influence shielded him from federal prosecution. For years, The Daily Beast has reported on Epstein’s alleged abuse, starting with Conchita Sarnoff's exposes on his easy jail sentence and soft treatment by the U.S. Attorney’s Office, which ultimately scrapped a 53-page indictment against Epstein. An earlier version of Epstein’s plea deal included a 10-year federal sentence—before his star-studded lawyers threatened to go to trial in a case prosecutors feared was unwinnable, in part because Epstein’s team dredged up dirt on the victims, including social media posts indicating drug use.Meanwhile, the financier flitted among his homes in Palm Beach, New York City, and the Virgin Islands, as well as his secluded Zorro Ranch in Stanley, New Mexico, transporting young women on his private jet to facilitate the sexual abuse that’s gone unchecked by authorities, his alleged victims say.

As stories go, a child sex case involving a Palm Beach billionaire was pretty big. It was covered in the British press, in Florida media, at The New York Post, and at Fox News. Bill O’Reilly led with the story on his Fox News show.But CNN and MSNBC did not breathe a word about a Democratic prosecutor refusing to hold a Democratic child rapist accountable.Epstein had given more than $145,000 to Democratic candidates and causes, including Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and Chuck Schumer. He was a big Israel backer. Bill Clinton and Democratic activist Ron Burkle were frequent guests on Epstein’s private plane, dubbed the “Lolita Express.” And Krischer was a hero for his dogged pursuit of Rush Limbaugh! Why bring up all this unpleasantness?

Here's an astonishing fact from the 1860 Census: only 1.4% of free people in the U.S. owned slaves in 1860. The VAST MAJORITY, ~98.6% of free people, did NOT own slaves. The common depiction of the U.S. as a nation brimming with slaveholders is a myth.https://t.co/uJbz5zwpzP

Ann Coulter debunks a popular myth. Read the whole thing, but here's the bottom line.

In response to DNA proof that only one of Hemings’ children was related to any Jefferson male -- and her firstborn son was definitely NOT fathered by any Jefferson -- the Thomas Jefferson Foundation, the Monticello Association and the National Genealogical Society promptly announced their official positions: Thomas Jefferson fathered all six of Hemings’ children! Guided tours of Monticello today include the provably false information that Jefferson fathered all of Hemings’ children.So now you, at least, know the truth -- not that it matters in the slightest. Happy Fourth of July!

Saturday, July 06, 2019

The press would still be covering up for the Democrat rapists in and out of the White House.

MacKinnon may actually have a point in claiming that the #MeToo movement never would have existed if Hillary Clinton had been elected president, given that feminists today appear to engage in selective outrage, and would likely have little to no interest in creating a movement seemingly against sexual assault unless it served a leftist political agenda.Modern-day feminists, for example, did not even appear to consider creating a #MeToo movement in response to Hillary Clinton, who has faced multiple allegations of enabling her husband Bill Clinton’s sexual assaults.In fact, when MacKinnon did mention sexual harassment claims against Bill Clinton, she referred to them as “a morality crusade,” and suggested that many people were concerned with the “right use” of the allegations made against the former president “for political gain.”“Claims of sexual harassment — by President Bill Clinton had previously identified the issue of sexual harassment for many people with the right use of it for political gain. That is, it made it into a morality crusade rather than a matter of coercion and exploitation,” said the law professor, who added that President Trump has changed the way in which people view reports of sexual assault.

There are so many things that we would never have learned if Hillary had been elected President incuding the use of the FBI, CIA and DOJ to spy on a Republican Preidential campaign.

To be fair James, this girl has been brainwashed, indoctrinated and used/abused.She is a marketing product created by her very well connected mother and an outfit called We Don’t Have TimeThey often get carried away with themselves. From the website Afrinik, quoting the book –Scener ur hjärtat by Malena Ernman, Svante Thunberg - Greta's motherAccording to her mother Malena Ernman (48), 16-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg can see CO2 with the naked eye. She writes that in the book ‘Scenes from the heart. Our life for the climate’, which she wrote with her family.

That was Andrew Breitbart's philosophy -- "I take the heat so that others won't have to."And that's why people loved him, and why people are disgusted with our current go-along-to-get-along cucks and cowards, the grifters and the opportunists, the check-cashers and clock-watchers which currently dominate, and I do mean dominate, the top positions of "conservative" media.Obviously I don't mean warriors like Michelle Malkin or Colonel Kurt Schlichter. I mean the people you're already thinking of, the people who take the position that "this culture war is so beneath me" and "Let the Garbage People be savaged by antifa until they've learned enough manners to mix with the Civilized People of the nominal right."

You will be denounced if you don't say the lie. If you can't defend reality we can't talk to each other. We can only resort to force when reason fails.

What is two plus two? Well, as it turns out, it depends.“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.” This statement was the “thoughtcrime” of Winston Smith, the protagonist in George Orwell’s novel “Nineteen Eighty-Four.” Though not yet a thoughtcrime in the real world, this statement is increasingly suspect.Politics is the conversation a whole people has about what is good and bad, and just and unjust regarding their common life and common nature as human beings.That conversation, of course, is only possible if language is possible, if words mean discernible things and are communicable. The famous story of the Tower of Babel, in which God mixed up the languages of men and forced them to scatter, is an apt analogy for the breakdown of politics following the breakdown of language.Language itself, though, is only possible if reason is possible. The law of noncontradiction holds that two plus two can’t be four and not-four at the same time. The whole potential for politics depends on that law, because by it people can use their reason to arrive at and assent to a conclusion, and by it, people can deliberate together and consent to government.If one denies the law of noncontradiction, however, all that remains is the tyrannical rule of force, one party foisting its will on the rest. A tyrant, after all, doesn’t bother asking for the opinion of his slaves.Increasingly, progressives are using perplexing language that subtly denies the law of noncontradiction and hence reason, language, and politics. These progressives imagine that they are merely resorting to unconventional terms in order to avoid acquiescing to modes of thinking they believe support unjust power structures.What they are really doing, however, is collapsing the only possible means of condemning injustice that isn’t itself a form of injustice. Tyranny can’t be made legitimate by making the tyrant and slave switch positions.You’ve Got Your Truth, and I’ve Got MineIn a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal, Oberlin College President Carmen Twillie Ambar defended the idea that the owners of a local bakery could be both guilty of racial profiling and innocent at the same time, depending on one’s perception.“You can have two different lived experiences, and both those things can be true,” she said. In other words, two plus two can equal four and not-four.However unusual, though, Ambar’s remark isn’t uncommon these days. It is often heard that certain people must speak their unique “truth” and society must recognize it as valid, even if it conflicts with an opposing perspective or plain facts.During the infamous Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court confirmation hearings, Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)—now a Democratic presidential candidate—praised Christine Blasey Ford for her boldness “to tell her truth,” regardless of whether her truth and the truth were the same thing.This comment about the nature of truth wasn’t an exceptional gaffe like his embarrassing “Spartacus moment.” Booker has incorporated that idea into at least eight graduation speeches: Harvard Law School (2008), Brandeis University (2009), Pitzer College (2010), the University of Rhode Island (2011), Williams College (2011), Bard College (2012), George Washington University (2016), and Princeton University (2018).His mantra is usually some form of an exhortation to “look for truth inside ourselves” and “tell your truth.” Revealingly, in his 2016 speech, Booker called truth simply one of the “profound ideals” of our country—a far cry indeed from “we hold these truths to be self-evident” as found in the Declaration of Independence.It’s highly inconvenient, however, to maintain that truth is subjective. An appeal to objective truth is a far better weapon, for it is the only standard that one’s antagonist must also recognize.